Plant milk has completely taken over the dairy alternative aisle - and increasingly the regular milk section too. Walk into any grocery store and you'll find oat, almond, soy, coconut, cashew, rice, hemp, macadamia, and increasingly pea-based options like Ripple all competing aggressively for shelf space and consumer attention. The protein claims are flying around everywhere on prominent front-of-package callouts - "8g protein!" "More protein than dairy!" "Complete protein source!" But with all this marketing noise and proliferation of options, I wanted to know: does protein content actually drive plant milk purchase? Or is it merely a tiebreaker at best when other more fundamental factors are already satisfied?
I ran a comprehensive study with six US consumers to find out. The results reveal a clear and surprisingly consistent decision hierarchy that every plant milk brand needs to understand if they want to win in this crowded and competitive category.
The Participants
What they had in common: they all buy plant milk regularly as part of their normal grocery routine and have experimented with multiple brands and varieties over time.
Additional shared characteristics: they've all stood in the plant milk aisle feeling overwhelmed by the sheer number of options, they've all formed strong opinions about what works best for different use cases, and they've all had to balance nutritional goals against taste preferences and budget constraints.
The Aisle Decision Process
Shoppers use a consistent three-step filter when navigating the plant milk aisle. This hierarchy determines what makes it into the cart:
First filter: Unsweetened labeling - participants scan for "unsweetened" before anything else
Second filter: Short ingredient list - fewer ingredients signal less processing and more authenticity
Third filter: Price and value - cost per ounce or per carton drives final selection
Notice what's conspicuously absent from the top of this list? Protein. Despite all the marketing emphasis on protein content, it functions as a secondary consideration that comes into play only after these primary filters are satisfied.
Protein: Tiebreaker, Not Driver
Protein functions as a secondary attribute for most plant milk consumers - a tiebreaker when two options are otherwise equal on sweetness, ingredients, and price. It rarely drives the initial purchase decision on its own. The exception: protein becomes primary for specific meal-use occasions like smoothies and oatmeal where the milk contributes meaningfully to the overall protein content of the meal.
One participant explained the situational consideration:
"If I'm making smoothies for breakfast, then yeah, I want around 8g of protein, so I grab soy or pea milk. But if I'm just using it for cereal or coffee, I don't care about protein at all. I want it to taste good and not add sweetness."
The acceptable premium for 8g protein (versus the 1-2g found in typical almond milk) is approximately 10-15% above the baseline price. Beyond that threshold, participants actively resist paying more unless the protein content is absolutely essential to their specific use case like protein smoothies for fitness goals.
The Pea Milk Problem
Pea-based milks like Ripple have genuine strengths that participants acknowledged: higher protein content than most alternatives, creamier texture, and excellent performance in smoothies and baking applications. One participant noted that pea milk is "closer to soy in texture - beats oat and almond" for thickness and mouthfeel.
But pea milk faces significant barriers to broader adoption:
Taste unfamiliarity - "pea milk" sounds strange to many consumers who haven't tried it
Coffee performance concerns - questions about steaming, frothing, and heat stability in hot drinks
Limited availability - not stocked everywhere, making it hard to maintain consistent purchase habits
Premium pricing - often more expensive than established alternatives like oat and almond
One participant described the coffee barrier directly:
"I tried pea milk in my coffee once and it separated weirdly. Looked gross. Now I use oat for coffee and soy for smoothies. Pea milk would need to prove it works in hot drinks before I'd switch."
The Use-Case Mapping
Participants have developed clear mental models about which plant milk works for which occasion. This mapping drives purchase decisions and brand loyalty:
Coffee and lattes: Oat milk dominates - froths well, tastes good, widely available at coffee shops
Smoothies: Soy or pea for protein content and creamy texture
Cereal: Almond for lightness, oat for creaminess, depends on cereal type
Baking: Soy or pea for structure, coconut for specific recipes
Drinking straight: Oat or coconut for taste enjoyment
Pea milk wins in the protein-forward occasions like smoothies but struggles to break into the coffee occasion where oat has established dominance.
What This Means for Plant Milk Brands
If I were advising a plant milk brand on their positioning and product strategy, here's what I'd take away:
Lead with unsweetened. This is the first filter consumers apply in the aisle.
Keep ingredient lists short. Simplicity signals quality and authenticity.
Position protein for specific occasions. Smoothie and meal-use messaging works better than general protein claims.
For pea milk: solve the coffee problem. Heat stability is the barrier to broader adoption.
The Bigger Picture
What struck me most about this research was how little protein content actually matters as a primary purchase driver despite all the marketing attention it receives. Despite the heavy marketing emphasis on protein grams and comparison charts, consumers consistently filter first on sweetness and ingredient simplicity. Protein is ultimately a nice-to-have feature that becomes relevant only in specific use cases like smoothie preparation.
The path forward for high-protein plant milks isn't more aggressive protein marketing or bigger numbers on the package - it's better occasion-specific positioning and solving the practical barriers like coffee performance. Pea milk has a real and defensible niche in smoothies and protein-forward occasions, but the coffee barrier is significant and worth serious engineering investment to solve.
Because at the end of the day, people buy plant milk for specific purposes. The brand that understands those purposes and delivers the right product for each occasion will win. Leading with protein when the consumer just wants good coffee is a losing strategy.
What the Research Revealed
We asked real consumers to share their thoughts. Here's what they told us:
If a plant-based milk brand wanted to win you over, what would it need to prove or demonstrate? What would finally make you take it seriously as a real alternative?
Melanie Guedea, 49, Unemployed Adult, Rural, PA, USA:
If they want me, they need to prove it in my kitchen, not on a fancy box. I’m open if it actually works, but I’m tired of paying for expensive oat water. Let’s be fair.
No curdling in hot coffee - pour straight into café con leche piping hot, no flakes, no sour taste.
Taste like something I want - not sweet, not cardboard, no weird aftertaste.
Cooks right - creamy arroz con leche and normal pancakes. Put simple tips on the carton.
Short ingredient list - skip the gums and oils. If it’s loaded up, I’m out.
Price close to dairy - and available at my small-town store, not just the city. Sales help.
Money-back guarantee - no app, no song and dance. A phone number that answers.
Froths with a cheap little whisk for lattes without separating.
Bilingual label and clear storage info so it doesn’t surprise me in a week.
Show up for the community - donate extras to the food pantry, not just ads on Facebook.
You really want me to take it seriously? Do a simple side-by-side at church or the grocery with hot coffee and a spoon, and let folks taste. If it passes that, I’ll buy a carton. What do you want it for - coffee, baking, or just to sip?
Jerry Villalobos, 29, Operations Manager, New York city, NY, USA:
If you want me to take it seriously, don’t bring a slide deck. Bring cartons and a thermometer. Show me it wins in the pitcher and on the line during a real rush. Here’s what it has to prove, no excuses:
Steam performance: stretches clean to 140-150 without getting gummy, holds glossy microfoam for latte art, pours a tight heart in an 8 and a 12. No big bubbles, no chalky finish.
Flavor: neutral, not cereal-sweet, no fake vanilla vibe. Espresso still leads. Blind taste with my regulars and crew and it doesn’t get called out.
Cold use: shakes to stable cold foam and doesn’t separate in iced lattes after 15 minutes. No weird film.
Consistency: three different lot codes over 60 days, same behavior. I’m not babysitting batches.
Price: don’t make me charge some wild upcharge. If it feels like 7 bucks a half gallon, I’m out.
Ingredients: short list, unsweetened, no magic-starch glue mouth. Keep it simple.
Packaging: 1L shelf-stable, stacks clean, pours clean. Space is gold in NYC fridges.
Supply: reliable distro to six stores, no surprise backorders, easy credits for bad batches. No auto-renew traps.
Training: one-page bilingual steam guide, 2-minute video, quick latte art tips. Make it easy for my new hires day one.
Support: fast human response. Saturday rush emergency? Someone picks up.
2-week pilot. 3 cases per store comped.
Side-by-side vs my current oat. Track pitcher waste, remakes, pour time, guest feedback.
If remakes stay under 2 percent, art holds, and regulars don’t complain, dale, we talk rollout.
I’ll probably still keep a tiny whole milk for Sunday café con leche because, cultura. But if your plant milk clears the above, I can run my shifts on it with a straight face. You confident enough to do a Saturday 10-2 at the LES store with my crew watching?
Mitchell Salcido, 32, Financial Analyst, Pocatello, ID, USA:
Prove it in a pan, not a billboard. It’s cold, I’m tired, and I want chowder that doesn’t split. If you want me to take it seriously, show me this:
Cooks clean - 15 minutes at a simmer in chowder or gravy, a splash of acid, bit of salt, and it doesn’t curdle, slime up, or go grainy. Reduce it without turning into paste.
Neutral taste - truly unsweetened. No vanilla, no cereal aftertaste, no weird perfume in coffee. Just... nothing. Like 2% behaves.
Simple ingredients - water, the base, salt, minerals. If there’s a stabilizer, one, and tell me why. No sugar, no dessert flavors, no chemistry set.
Real texture - body like 2%. Coats a spoon, no chalk, no grit, no sludge at the bottom after sitting.
Price sanity - in the ballpark of store-brand dairy, not double. On shelves at WinCo or Ridley’s, not just the bougie aisle.
Shelf-stable option that doesn’t taste like cardboard.
Honest label - call it what it is. Drop the smug planet sermon. Be straight, I’ll listen.
Third-party proof - unsponsored cook tests. If a cranky YouTuber or a place I trust shows it works, I’ll believe it. Marketing copy means nothing.
Consistency - same result batch to batch. I’m not babysitting gravy because your formula wandered.
Make-good - if it splits, money back. Simple.
Potato-corn chowder at a simmer.
Sausage gravy over biscuits.
Creamy tomato soup - acid test.
Do that, keep it unsweet, simple, affordable, and sure, I’ll take it seriously. Until then, it’s still pantry-backup oat water.
Malik Grant, 31, None, Escondido, CA, USA:
Talk is cheap. You want me to take a plant-based seriously, prove it behind bar, not with a pretty carton or an influencer reel. I’m lactose-light so I’m not your hater, I’m your stress test. If it can’t hang in a Monday rush with a bright single origin and a shaky new hire, it’s not real. What I need to see:
Espresso performance: no split in a 1:2 shot, glossy microfoam that holds art 3 minutes, forgiving between 130-150 F so I’m not babysitting the pitcher. Works on washed Ethiopians and darker blends, hot and iced.
Iced + cold brew proof: shaken over ice without floccing, no weird separation after 30 minutes. Still tastes clean in cold brew where sweetness pops.
Taste: neutral-sweet, no beany or chalky tail, no cereal-milk vibe that bulldozes origin notes.
Ingredients: low sugar, minimal gums, nothing that reads like a science project. If you add protein, it better not turn the cup to paste.
Consistency: batch-to-batch same behavior, open-carton stable for 7 days, shelf-stable case that doesn’t hog my dry storage.
Cost: case price that keeps my per-drink milk cost sane so I don’t need a cringe upcharge. Don’t make me pay 6 bucks a carton and pretend that’s normal.
Operational wins: faster steam to target temp than my current oat, less waste from splits, fewer remakes. Show me a pilot where my remakes drop and my line moves quicker - I’ll feel that in tips and labor.
Training + support: clear steaming guidelines, no hard sell. West Coast distribution that actually delivers on time. No contracts, no hidden fees.
Sourcing + packaging: transparent supply chain, recyclable packaging that isn’t greenwashing. Spare me the buzzwords, give me receipts.
How you win me over: bring a case, do a blind lineup with my crew, log results for a week, and if it steams clean, tastes right, and doesn’t nuke my COGS, I’ll switch tomorrow. If it flops once in a rush, it’s off the bar - I don’t have patience for carton cosplay in this heat and neither do my guests.
Some plant-based milks now claim to be "nutritionally equivalent to dairy" with the same protein, calcium, and vitamins. Does this change your perception at all? Or are you still skeptical?
Melanie Guedea, 49, Unemployed Adult, Rural, PA, USA:
I’ll be real: those labels make me roll my eyes. On paper sounds nice, but if it curdles in hot coffee or makes my pancakes funky, I don’t care what the box says. I stick with regular milk because it’s predictable and usually cheaper, and I only grab plant milk for guests or a sale smoothie. So I’m still skeptical till one actually tastes right and behaves in café con leche and arroz con leche. What do you want it for, exactly - coffee, baking, or just to sip?
Malik Grant, 31, None, Escondido, CA, USA:
Short answer: still skeptical. Slapping “nutritionally equivalent” on the carton feels like a marketing flex, not a guarantee my shot won’t curdle or my latte won’t taste like wet cardboard. Protein parity looks cute on paper, but in the cup it often means pea blends that get chalky or heavy, plus extra gums that mess with texture. If someone actually nails the protein and calcium and it steams clean, doesn’t split, and doesn’t read like cereal milk, then sure, I’ll recalibrate. But I don’t need dairy cosplay - I need something that treats my gut right, plays nice with espresso acidity, and doesn’t cost six bucks a hit. What would move me:
Performance: stable microfoam, no split in a 1:2 shot, holds art.
Taste: neutral-sweet, no beany or chalky tail.
Label: low sugar, fewer weird thickeners.
Price: sub-5 dollars or a legit cafe case price.
Edith Avent, 37, Stay-at-Home Parent, Wichita city, KS, USA:
It changes it a little, but not much. I don’t trust the front claim; I check the back. If I see real protein per cup, solid calcium and vitamin D, no added sugar, and the price sits under about $2.29 for a half gallon, I’ll use it for smoothies, oats, and baking. I’m still skeptical on “equivalent” because cereal and mac and cheese want dairy in my house, and the kids notice texture fast. If it tastes chalky or thin, or the promo jumps to $4.49, I skip it. So my view shifts a notch, but budget and use-case still decide.
Jerry Villalobos, 29, Operations Manager, New York city, NY, USA:
Short answer: still skeptical. Labels talk. The pitcher tells the truth. Why I don’t buy the hype:
In the cup is what matters. Protein grams on a carton don’t fix weird sweetness, gluey foam, or that cereal-y aftertaste some “enhanced” oats get.
Steam behavior: dairy stretches predictably. A lot of “equivalent” blends get gummy at 140-150°F or split when you push a longer wand time. I’ve tossed too many pitchers to trust a claim.
Consistency: batch to batch swings. One week it’s silky, next week it’s sludge. I don’t gamble mid-rush.
Ingredients: when the deck reads like a science fair, I tap out. I’m not chasing vitamins in a latte. I eat real food for that.
Price: if “equivalence” means 7 bucks a half gallon, bye. ROI matters, at home and on shift.
We piloted a “high-protein oat” at Williamsburg - foamed thick but muddy on the palate, slightly chalky finish, slowed pours because it scorched faster. Guests noticed. Pull-through dipped after week one. So, dale, I’m open if it actually tastes clean, steams clean, and stays under my price line. Until then, I stick to my unsweetened barista oat and keep a tiny whole milk for Sunday café con leche. You care about the protein in your latte, or just the texture and flavor?
When you see plant-based milk in the grocery store, what is your honest reaction? Is this something you actively seek out, actively avoid, or something in between?
Melanie Guedea, 49, Unemployed Adult, Rural, PA, USA:
Honestly? I usually walk right past it. I don’t chase food trends, and those cartons are pricey for something that tastes like watered-down oatmeal in my coffee. I’ll keep a carton of oat or almond on hand if we’re hosting and someone can’t do dairy, porque hospitalidad, but for our house it’s regular milk for cereal, baking, and café con leche. If it’s on sale, I might grab one for smoothies, but I lean toward avoid. What do you want it for - coffee, baking, or just to sip?
Gabriele Lamb, 34, Financial Analyst, Akron city, OH, USA:
Gut reaction? In between, leaning no. I usually grab 2% for cereal and half-and-half for coffee. Most plant-based stuff reads like a marketing aisle to me and a lot of it tastes like slightly sweet water. Oat is the only one I can live with, and even then only for a latte at home if it’s on sale. Soy takes over the flavor, almond is too thin, coconut feels like dessert, not Tuesday coffee. Price is the kicker. Per quart it’s often higher than regular milk, and I’m not paying extra for a long ingredient list. I’ll keep a shelf-stable carton around for guests or a smoothie week, sure, but day to day I stick with dairy. It’s cold out and hot cocoa with the real stuff just hits better.
Jerry Villalobos, 29, Operations Manager, New York city, NY, USA:
Gut check in the aisle? In between. I’m not anti-dairy, I’m not worshipping plants. I look at that wall of cartons and think, cool, options, but most of it is marketing fluff. If it helps the cup and doesn’t taste weird, dale. What I actually do:
Oat: yeah. Unsweetened, barista-style. Steams clean, plays nice with espresso. That’s my default at home.
Dairy: still keep a small whole milk for a proper café con leche on a slow Sunday. There’s a place for it.
Almond: pass. Too thin. Tastes like scented water to me.
Soy: fine in a pinch, but it can split and the flavor fights the shot.
Coconut: dessert-only vibes. Not for my morning latte.
Pea: smoothie material, not my espresso.
So yeah, I seek out a specific oat and ignore 80% of the shelf. I’m picky about texture and aftertaste, not chasing whatever carton went viral this week. If it’s like 7 bucks a half gallon, I keep walking. What do you use in your coffee right now?
Malik Grant, 31, None, Escondido, CA, USA:
Gut reaction? I clock the wall of cartons, roll my eyes at the gimmicky ones, then grab what I need and bounce. I’m mildly lactose intolerant, so plant-based isn’t a trend for me - it’s just how I keep coffee and cereal from fighting me all day. In the cafe world I care about texture and how it plays with espresso acidity, and a lot of these milks are sugary or thin or split ugly, so yeah, I’m picky. I actively seek out barista-style oat for daily use. The rest is case-by-case and mostly a no.
Oat: my default for coffee and smoothies. Reliable microfoam, rounded sweetness.
Almond: hard pass in coffee, too thin and tastes like nut dust tea. Maybe in a smoothie if it’s unsweetened.
Soy: fine with cereal or baking, but it reads beany in a flat white.
Coconut: great for curries and rice, not my coffee.
Pea: hit or miss, chalky aftertaste unless it’s buried in a protein shake.
I check labels for sneaky sugar and a laundry list of gums, and if a carton is flirting with 6 bucks, nah. If it says “barista” and still splits in my shot, it’s dead to me.
